Standard Language in Bosna and Hercegovina - in Language Policy Documents

From the beginning of the standardisation of language in Bosnia and Herzegovina, i.e. from the acceptance of Karadzic's phonetic spelling in the mid-19th century, to the present day when there are three different language standards in force - Bosniac (Muslim), Croatian and Serbian, language in Bosnia and Herzegovina has been a subject of political conflict. Documents on language policy from this period show the degree to which domestic and foreign political factors influenced the standard language issue, beginning with the very appellation for the specific norm regulation. The material analysed (proclamations by political, cultural and other organisations as well as corresponding constitutional and statutory provisions on language use) shows the differing treatment of the standard language in Bosnia and Herzegovina in different historical periods. During the period of Turkish rule (until 1878) there was no real political interest in the issue. Under Austro-Hungarian rule (1878-1918) there was an attempt to use the language as a means of forming a united Bosnian nation, but this was later abandoned. During the first Yugoslavia (1918-1941) a uniform solution was imposed on Bosnia and Herzegovina, as throughout the Serbo-Croatian language area, while under the Independent State of Croatia (1941-1945), the official language of Bosnia and Herzegovina was Croatian. The period from 1945 to 1991 had two phases: the first a standard language unity of Serbs, Croats, Muslims and Montenegrins (until 1965), and the second a gradual but stormy separation of national languages, which has been largely completed since 1991. The introductory study includes a detailed analysis of all the expressions used, with special reference to the present state, and accompanies the collection of documents which represent the main outcome of the research.

A Comparative Study of English Word Order Acquisition by Elementary and Secondary School Pupils - Native Speakers of Serbian and Hungarian

Kitic investigated the phenomenon of English word order acquisition by Serbian and Hungarian speakers, examining both the theoretical and empirical aspects of this phenomenon. She began by looking at language learning and language acquisition, viewing word order acquisition in the context of relevant linguistic and psycholinguistic knowledge. The main hypothesis of her empirical investigation was that the majority of word order mistakes in the language production of Serbian and Hungarian speakers of English is due to mother tongue interference. Three supporting hypotheses were introduced to specify the phenomenon of interference in its correlation to (1) language proficiency, (2) sentence patterns, and (3) optional adverbials. The conclusions were based on error analysis of 9280 sentences of 464 elementary and high school learners. The results showed that a learner's level of proficiency seems to be a relevant factor in mother tongue interference as this decreases with increased proficiency. Word order errors are however fossilised at the highest levels. The causes of interference errors, which increase with the number of sentence elements, are either absent sentence patterns or similar ones. In the case of adverbials, word order errors have two forms: interrelation (with canonical elements) and mixed adverbials.

The Sociolinguistics of Hungarian Outside Hungary

This study describes the sociolinguistic situation of the indigenous Hungarian national minorities in Slovakia (c. 600,000), Ukraine (c. 180,000), Romania (c. 2,000,000), Yugoslavia (c. 300,000), Slovenia (c. 8,000) and Austria (c. 6,000). Following the guidelines of Hans Goebl et al, the historical sociolinguistic portrait of each minority is presented from 1920 through to the mid-1990s. Each country's report includes sections on geography and demography, history, politics, economy, culture and religion, language policy and planning, and language use (domains of minority and/or majority language use, proficiency, attitudes, etc.). The team's findings were presented in the form of 374 pages of manuscripts, articles and tables, written in Hungarian and English. The core of the team's research results lies in the results of an empirical survey designed to study the social characteristics of Hungarian-minority bilingualism in the six project countries, and the linguistic similarities and differences between the six contact varieties of Hungarian and Hungarian in Hungary. The respondents were divided by age, education, and settlement group - city vs. village and local majority vs. local minority. The first thing to be observed is that Hungarian is tending to be spoken less to children than to parents and grandparents, a familiar pattern of language shift. In contact varieties of Hungarian, analytic constructions may be used where monolingual Hungarians would use a more synthetic form. Mr Kontra gives as an example the compound tagdij, which in Standard Hungarian means "membership fee" but which is replaced in contact Hungarian by the two-word phrase tagsagi dij. Another similar example concerns the synthetic verb hegedult "played the violin" and the analytic expression hegedun jatszott. The contrast is especially striking between the Hungarians in the northern Slavic countries, who use the synthetic form frequently, and those in the southern Slavic countries, who mainly use the analytic form. Mr. Kontra notes that from a structural point of view, there is no immediate explanation for this, since Slovak or Ukrainian are as likely to cause interference as is Serbian. He postulates instead that the difference may be attributable to some sociohistoric cause, and points out that the Turkish occupation of what is today Voivodina caused a discontinuity of the Hungarian presence in the region, with the result that Hungarians were resettled in the area only two and a half centuries ago. However, the Hungarians in today's Slovakia and Ukraine have lived together with Slavic peoples continuously for over a millennium. It may be, he suggests, that 250 years of interethnic coexistence is less than is needed for such a contact-induced change to run its course. Next Mr. Kontra moved on to what he terms "mental maps and morphology". In Hungarian, the names of cities and villages take the surface case (eg. Budapest-en "in Budapest") whereas some names denoting Hungarian settlements and all names of foreign cities take the interior case (eg. Tihany-ban "in Tihany" and Boston-ban "in Boston). The role of the semantic feature "foreign" in suffix-choice can be illustrated by such minimal pairs as Velence-n "in Velence, a village in Hungary" versus Velence-ben "in Velence [=Venice], a city in Italy", and Pecs-en "in Pecs, a city in Hungary" vs. Becs-ben "in Becs, ie. Vienna". This Hungarian vs. foreign distinction is often interpreted as "belonging to historical (pre-1920) Hungary" vs. "outside historical Hungary". The distinction is also expressed in the dichotomy "home" vs. "abroad'. The 1920 border changes have had an impact on both majority and minority Hungarians' mental maps, the maps which govern the choice of surface vs. interior cases with placenames. As there is a growing divergence between the mental maps of majority and minority Hungarians, so there will be a growing divergence in their use of the placename suffixes. Two placenames were chosen to scratch the surface of this complex problem: Craiova (a city in Oltenia, Romania) and Kosovo (Hungarian Koszovo) an autonomous region in southeast Yugoslavia. The assumption to be tested was that both placenames would be used with the inessive (interior) suffixes categorically by Hungarians in Hungary, but that the superessive suffix (showing "home") would be used near-categorically by Hungarians in Romania and Yugoslavia (Voivodina). Minority Hungarians in countries other than Romania and Yugoslavia would show no difference from majority Hungarians in Hungary. In fact, the data show that, contrary to expectation, there is considerable variation within Hungary. And although Koszovo is used, as expected, with the "home" suffix by 61% of the informants in Yugoslavia, the same suffix is used by an even higher percentage of the subjects in Slovenia. Mr. Kontra's team suggests that one factor playing a role in this might be the continuance of the former Yugoslav mentality in the Hungarians of Slovenia, at least from the geographical point of view. The contact varieties of Hungarian show important grammatical differences from Hungarian in Hungary. One of these concerns the variable use of Null subjects (the inclusion or exclusion of the subject of the verb). When informants were asked to insert either megkertem or megkertem ot - "I asked her" - into a test sentence, 54.9% of the respondents in the Ukraine inserted the second phrase as opposed to only 27.4% in Hungary. Although Mr. Kontra and his team concentrated more on the differences between Contact Hungarian and Standard Hungarian, they also discovered a number of similarities. One such similarity is demonstrable in the distribution of what Mr. Kontra calls an ongoing syntactic merger in Hungarian in Hungary. This change means effectively that two possibilities merge to form a third. For instance, the two sentences Valoszinuleg kulfoldre fognak koltozni and Valoszinu, hogy kulfoldre fognak koltozni merge to form the new construction Valszinuleg, hogy kulfoldre fognak koltozni ("Probably they will move abroad."). When asked to choose "the most natural" of the sentences, one in four chose the new construction, and a chi-square test shows homogeneity in the sample. In other words, this syntactic change is spreading across the entire Hungarian-speaking region in the Carpathian Basin Mr. Kontra believes that politicians, educators, and other interested parties now have reliable and up-to-date information about each Hungarian minority. An awareness of Hungarian as a pluricentric language is being developed which elevates the status of contact varieties of Hungarian used by the minorities, an essential process, he believes, if minority languages are to be maintained.

The Hungarian Economic Elite After the Political Transition

Erzsebet Szalai (Hungary). The Hungarian Economic Elite after the Political Transition. Ms. Szalai is a research fellow in the Institute of Political Sciences in Budapest and worked on this project from July 1996 to June 1998. In the period following the political changes of 1989, the leading forces of the economic elite have gained increasing superiority over the political and cultural elites, with the clear ambition of putting the latter to their service. The power relations within the economic elite were characterised by "a war of all against all". The desire to gain precedence over others became an openly declared value. The formation of estates and the intensification of competition became embodied in a multitude of lobbies which cropped up to assert short-term interests. After the state socialist period, possession of at least two of the social, economic and cultural forms of capital is necessary to join one of the three segments of the elite: political, cultural or economic. What defines the ability of the members of the three elite groups to assert their interests is their ability to convert any of the three types of capital into another. That is to say, the basis on which they can retain and extend their position is "symbolic capital" as interpreted by Bourdieu. The concept of symbolic capital is useful for describing the power relations following the collapse of state socialist systems and societies. In the state-socialist system, the political, economic and cultural spheres are tightly interwoven, and this interpenetration slackens only slowly after the system's disintegration. A close institutional relationship between the three spheres continues to make it easier for power actors to convert social, economic and cultural capital from one type to another. Symbolic capital, or the easy transfer between the three spheres, in turn reproduces the institutional relationship, or more precisely, complicates the separation of the three spheres after the fall of state socialism.

The Social Desintegration of an Ethnical German Group from Romanian Village Community Comparative with a Romanian Group and Hungarian Group from some Village Their Integration into the German Society

Zarna is witness to the disappearance of the Swabian community in Santana, a process which seems to date back to before the major changes in Central and Eastern Europe. His project showed how a strong German ethnic community, formed more than 250 years ago, has virtually disappeared from the village of Santana (Romania). Zarna presents the causes leading to the loss of their ethnic identity, of their culture, traditions and of the collective reproduction of their ethnicity, although the last Swabians remaining in the village have preserved their individual identity and not let themselves be assimilated. The policy of the former communist regime is not sufficient to explain the decline of the German ethnic group, nor is the present international context with its varying effects on the form and reproduction of their ethnic identity. Zarna has analysed the origins of the Swabian community, its development, historical changes (both desired and imposed) and the disappearance of elements that determined their German culture and their pride in being German. The Germans have demobilised more rapidly than other ethnic groups in Romania, partly because of Germany's pro-emigration policy over the last two decades. Many of the emigrants were however, poorly prepared for emigration and have not been able to recreate the prosperous financial situation which they left. The prevalent feeling among those interviewed was disappointment and this increases with age and education.

Colour Symbolism, Colour Preference in Hungarian Folklore and Folk Architecture"

The Hungarian way of decoration has certain characteristics which are rooted in the deep symbolism of ancient Hungarian mythical thinking. The ancient heritage of the Hungarians' former homeland somewhere in the Urals included eastern elements. During their migrations, the Hungarian tribes met other eastern peoples and their culture of decoration became mixed with elements drawn from these new contacts. These diverse influences mean that the Hungarian way of thinking, building and ornamentation show a certain dualism of Puritanism and rationalism in the creation of space and manufacturing, and rich fantasy in decoration and ornamentation. The Hungarians use coloured ornamentation to emphasise the symbolic importance of details. The colouring system of the built environment shows the same dualism: the main colour of the facades and inner walls is white, while the furniture, textiles, gates and windows, and sometimes the gable and fireplace are richly decorated. In Hungarian symbolism, the house and settlement are a model of the universe, so their different parts also have a transcendent meaning. The traditional meanings of the different colours reflect this transcendence. Each colour has ambivalent meanings: RED - the colour of blood - means violence and love. YELLOW - means sickness, death and ripeness (golden yellow). BLUE - means innocence, eternity (light blue) and old age, death (dark blue). BLACK - can be both ceremonial and mourning. WHILE - can have sacred meaning (bright white), while yellowish white fabric is the most common garb of both men and women in village society. GREEN - the only colour without a dual meaning, symbolises the beginning of life. Until the late 18th and early 19th centuries Hungarian folk art used one or two-coloured decoration (red, black, blue, red-blue or red-black), and from the early 19th century it moved to multi-coloured decoration. Colours are characteristically used in complementary contrast, with bright colours on a plain ground and an avoidance of subtle shadings.